Humble Bundle Thread

gilby said:
Yup. 2009's Arkham Asylum established itself as the gold standard for timing-based melee combat. While it's understandable that Ubisoft would copy that style, it is a bit slimy that they did it so quickly with the release of the first Assassin's Creed in 2007.
Click to expand...
Lol was wondering the same thing. AC1 came out years before Batman. Reminds me of around the time AC Brotherhood was coming out (2010) I remember a lot of reviewers saying that they were copying Batman combat. Confused me cause Brotherhood combat was basically the same as AC1 but more ignorable thanks to the chain kill mechanic. Also everyone just seemed to ignore Syndicate which is where they actually did copy Batman (combo meter on screen with finishers every X number of sequential hits.)

Also calling AC a hack and slash is a giant question mark from me. The series started out with a heavy stealth focus. The combat wasn't exactly the draw or anything, the reason it was so basic is because outside of the really terrible boss fights you were meant to run away and hide until enemies lost track of you. Kinda why I never liked comparisons to Batman actually, AC didn't have a real combat system. It just had the bare minimum a stealth game needs which by its simplistic nature makes it comparable to almost any game with melee combat. I mean it's essentially a bad version of every game with a parry mechanic by that logic, but it wasn't a combat focused game so.... ????

 
Zenax[zd] said:
Also calling AC a hack and slash is a giant question mark from me. The series started out with a heavy stealth focus. The combat wasn't exactly the draw or anything, the reason it was so basic is because outside of the really terrible boss fights you were meant to run away and hide until enemies lost track of you. Kinda why I never liked comparisons to Batman actually, AC didn't have a real combat system. It just had the bare minimum a stealth game needs which by its simplistic nature makes it comparable to almost any game with melee combat. I mean it's essentially a bad version of every game with a parry mechanic by that logic, but it wasn't a combat focused game so.... ????
Click to expand...
No, the combat was a draw. AC had stealth, environment movement, and combat all together. It was the combination of them that made it stand out as something new. (Though honestly it was the movement--running and climbing--that really shone.)

Though in terms of combat, what came before in terms of timing-based combat? I'd guess the Prince of Persia games were direct precursors to Assassin's Creed, which makes sense as they were Ubisoft. Further back I'd guess Shenmue would qualify.

 
agentghost said:
here is the irony, AC: Odyssey is .. eh.. not an Assassin's Creed game :whistle2:
Click to expand...
It is, and it isn't. It has the name. It has parts of the previous games. But it's also something very much different.

I spent the early part of playing it wondering where my Assassin's Creed went, while enjoying it the whole time. I still miss parts of the old formula that are gone, many hours in, and yet it's probably my favorite gaming experience in a game with Assassin's Creed in the name.

I do think I'm going to play an older AC game when I'm done, though. Unity, perhaps. Or maybe replay AC2.

 
gilby said:
Yup. 2009's Arkham Asylum established itself as the gold standard for timing-based melee combat. While it's understandable that Ubisoft would copy that style, it is a bit slimy that they did it so quickly with the release of the first Assassin's Creed in 2007.
Click to expand...
:lol: "the gold standard of timing-based melee combat"? Demon's Souls came out in 2009.

Where did you get the impression I was calling AC derivative of Arkham?? I literally said the opposite. The Arkham games are the gold standard of something for sure, but not anything gameplay-related.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Zenax[zd] said:
Also calling AC a hack and slash is a giant question mark from me. The series started out with a heavy stealth focus.
Click to expand...
Assassin's Creed is not Metal Gear Solid stealth, it's Tenchu stealth, i.e. hack-and-slash stealth (not to compare AC, which is garbage, to MGS or Tenchu, which are great). AC's "stealth" is: sneak around until you get caught, then do boring combat. Or, once you can't stand how boring the combat is, run away from the enemies and hide to avoid the punishment of having to play the game's boring combat.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I dunno, I was amused a couple times just brazenly walking into the middle of an army camp, waiting for people to notice me, and then just killing everybody while the captains kept yelling “get him!”

Then eventually people run away, and you just mind your own business for half a minute till more people notice you and are like, hey, one guy literally drenched in entrail standing in the middle of a field of eviscerated soldiers, I bet we can take him. And that’s when you Zoidberg away.
 
Ex~ said:
:lol: "the gold standard of timing-based melee combat"? Demon's Souls came out in 2009.

Where did you get the impression I was calling AC derivative of Arkham?? I literally said the opposite. The Arkham games are the gold standard of something for sure, but not anything gameplay-related.
Click to expand...
Demon's Souls has a different style of combat, and yes, it is the gold standard of that style.

And Arkham is certainly the gold standard of timing (or rhythm) style of combat. You've made it quite clear you dislike the Arkham games so I'll leave you to continue your Quixotic struggle on this point.

Ex~ said:
Assassin's Creed is not Metal Gear Solid stealth, it's Tenchu stealth, i.e. hack-and-slash stealth (not to compare AC, which is garbage, to MGS or Tenchu, which are great). AC's "stealth" is: sneak around until you get caught, then do boring combat. Or, once you can't stand how boring the combat is, run away from the enemies and hide to avoid the punishment of having to play the game's boring combat.
Click to expand...
You glossed right over a key point. Run away from the enemies, using the movement-in-space aspect of the game. The running and climbing was, is, an integral point of what made the Assassin's Creed games work. Assassin's Creed wasn't just stealth, it wasn't just combat, it wasn't just movement--it was all of them. The combat wasn't as good as some other games, but it was competent, the stealth was simpler than some other games, but it was solid, and the movement was as good as anything up to that point. The complaints about the first Assassin's Creed game, at the time, weren't related to those three elements, they were related to the lack of variety in things to do that used those elements.

Of course, we've been talking about Odyssey, the latest Assassin's Creed game. The movement mechanics work really well, but they're no longer designed around. No need to do fun parkour running. No need to carefully pick climbing routes. (Also no accidentally back-leaping off of a wall to your death.) The stealth is still there, but far simplified. No more social stealth. No more wide variety of hiding spots. Though using cover and sight lines is probably done as well or better than any of the classic games. (Also no more staying close enough to overhear someone but not being able to actually overhear them because you need to just barely stay in range in order to not be spotted.) No more responding to a visual cue with the proper button response at the right time to get through a combat. (Also, no more responding to a visual cue with the proper button response at the right time to get through a combat again. And again. And again.) These changes are why some, like agentghost above, say it's not really an Assassin's Creed game.

 
gilby said:
No, the combat was a draw. AC had stealth, environment movement, and combat all together. It was the combination of them that made it stand out as something new. (Though honestly it was the movement--running and climbing--that really shone.)

Though in terms of combat, what came before in terms of timing-based combat? I'd guess the Prince of Persia games were direct precursors to Assassin's Creed, which makes sense as they were Ubisoft. Further back I'd guess Shenmue would qualify.
Click to expand...
Eh agree to disagree I guess but also not really my main point. AC wasn't advertised as a "hack and slash" on Ubi's end. All the original trailers and gameplay focused more on the traversal and stealth elements of the game. Someone was really proud of that whole putting up your hood and blending in with a group of priests thing.

But also bringing up Shenmue gets back to what I really wanted to get across. Shenmue combat is rooted more in 2D beat 'em ups and fighting games (that style of game was right in Yu Suzuki's wheelhouse after all), I mean the game has a combo list that looks like something out of a fighting game for example. In fact there was even a big emphasis on grabs and knock down moves which is the bread and butter of a beat 'em up. It's only comparable to AC at such a simplistic level because the only actual mechanic AC combat had going on was timing your parries. But you can't define a combat system on that because it's such a common component. I mean if that is the line to compare to then AC combat is comparable to Batman, Souls, and even Devil May Cry combat as that is a key component of all of them.

Saying old AC even had a real fleshed out combat system is a stretch as far as I am concerned.

 
My backlog is so ridiculous that I still have not played the Arkham games and only part of a couple of A. Creed games, so in order to get involved in this debate I am just going to say that Ninja Gaiden Black is better than any of these games, especially the ones I have not played at all and has better combat.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I played all of these games on Youtube and can easily say they all suck when compared to Red Dead Redemption 2. Good thing Rockstar produced something that wasn't just a remastered version of a game they released 15 years ago.

 
So I may have purchased a bundle, completely unaware that I own most of the things in it. So if anyone is looking for Just Deserts, Highway Blossoms, or Ladykiller from the VN bundle, lemme know.

Edit: And Sunset Academy!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Zenax[zd] said:
Eh agree to disagree I guess but also not really my main point. AC wasn't advertised as a "hack and slash" on Ubi's end. All the original trailers and gameplay focused more on the traversal and stealth elements of the game. Someone was really proud of that whole putting up your hood and blending in with a group of priests thing.
Click to expand...
I remember well the cinematic trailer for Assassin's Creed. Watch it again. It shows combat. It shows very Assassin's Creed combat. Crossbow to take out one guard, parry+attack on the second, then a flying hidden blade attack to finish off the target. It was amazing. One of the few game trailers that really stand out over my time gaming. Here. It's the first one on this compilation video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zhfmz3rEehI

Zenax[zd] said:
But also bringing up Shenmue gets back to what I really wanted to get across. Shenmue combat is rooted more in 2D beat 'em ups and fighting games (that style of game was right in Yu Suzuki's wheelhouse after all), I mean the game has a combo list that looks like something out of a fighting game for example. In fact there was even a big emphasis on grabs and knock down moves which is the bread and butter of a beat 'em up. It's only comparable to AC at such a simplistic level because the only actual mechanic AC combat had going on was timing your parries. But you can't define a combat system on that because it's such a common component. I mean if that is the line to compare to then AC combat is comparable to Batman, Souls, and even Devil May Cry combat as that is a key component of all of them.

Saying old AC even had a real fleshed out combat system is a stretch as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...
Yes, any game with combat involves timing, but the react to cue timing that's often called Arkham-style combat is something different than what's often called Souls-style. (Though what really can be compared to Souls? Monster Hunter, maybe?) I'd argue that Shenmue influenced games that led to Arkham-style, including Prince of Persia and Assassin's Creed. Of course there are games that don't really seem to be best described by either moniker. What would you call Mount and Blade's combat? Fable's combat?

AC's combat system didn't have an extensive move list like Shenmue or Arkham, but it was certainly fleshed-out enough to do its job as one of the three central supporting components of the game.

 
Some years back I considered buying most of these in some previous bundle with the thought that my son would enjoy them, but I never ended up installing the few I've grabbed and he's beyond the age range for these at this point.

 
nitrosmob said:
That's a lot of stuff bundled, but not the target audience for sure. Wonder if these old games even hold up anymore.
Click to expand...
I think all the good point and click adventure games hold up really well. My girlfriend downloaded some Spy Fox games on her iPad that she remembered from her childhood and they were good fun, although I never played those myself (or actually any of the titles in this bundle... I guess I lived a deprived childhood).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I mainly played stuff like Bubble Bobble and other stuff on floppy disks. By the time I got to CDs I wanted to play adventure games like Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Day of the Tentacle and Sam & Max Hit the Road. Very fun!

 
Super Solvers, Number Munchers, Reader Rabbit, Odell Lake, Oregon Trail, and Spelunx (which was sort of like a Myst prototype) are the edutainment games I can remember playing back in the day.

Actually found a place to play Super Solvers: Midnight Rescue online recently. It's surprisingly enjoyable.

EDIT:
Almost forgot about Amazon Trail. I remember playing that quite often, actually.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Souffrir said:
Super Solvers, Number Munchers, Reader Rabbit, Odell Lake, Oregon Trail, and Spelunx (which was sort of like a Myst prototype) are the edutainment games I can remember playing back in the day.
Click to expand...
Odell Lake, yes, but what about Odell Woods?

Those two, Lemonade Stand, Oregon Trail, and Karateka were the main ones I remember from school. Plus TI99 games at home.

I also remember a computer game (Apple?) that involved mice knights. You could be in the Order of Brie or the Order of Camembert. I can find absolutely nothing about it online, though.

 
nitrosmob said:
I mainly played stuff like Bubble Bobble and other stuff on floppy disks. By the time I got to CDs I wanted to play adventure games like Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Day of the Tentacle and Sam & Max Hit the Road. Very fun!
Click to expand...
Back when Adventure Games were actually games instead of visual novels!

 
Souffrir said:
Fixed that for you.
Click to expand...
Dubya Tee Efff? (Real) Adventure Games aren't my thing anymore but I dunno how you can say games like the old Sam & Max series (pre Telltale) or Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis are crap? Pretty much the golden age of Adventure Games with LucasArts and Sierra.

 
My first adventure game...

screenshot_674-pirate-adventure-exploring-the-area.png
 
Mooby said:
Dubya Tee Efff? (Real) Adventure Games aren't my thing anymore but I dunno how you can say games like the old Sam & Max series (pre Telltale) or Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis are crap? Pretty much the golden age of Adventure Games with LucasArts and Sierra.
Click to expand...
Adventure is just a crappy genre. You either play it for the puzzles, which seem to come in only two flavors (batshit crazy nonsense or absurdly simplistic), or you play it for the story/writing, which is even more hampered by all the ridiculous attempts at having some kind of gameplay than most game genres.

I understand there are games people like and even consider classic in the genre, but the genre itself is fundamentally bad and has always been fundamentally bad.
 
Souffrir said:
Adventure is just a crappy genre. You either play it for the puzzles, which seem to come in only two flavors (batshit crazy nonsense or absurdly simplistic), or you play it for the story/writing, which is even more hampered by all the ridiculous attempts at having some kind of gameplay than most game genres.

I understand there are games people like and even consider classic in the genre, but the genre itself is fundamentally bad and has always been fundamentally bad.
Click to expand...
CPGWqxo.gif


 
Souffrir said:
Adventure is just a crappy genre. You either play it for the puzzles, which seem to come in only two flavors (batshit crazy nonsense or absurdly simplistic), or you play it for the story/writing, which is even more hampered by all the ridiculous attempts at having some kind of gameplay than most game genres.

I understand there are games people like and even consider classic in the genre, but the genre itself is fundamentally bad and has always been fundamentally bad.
Click to expand...
I thought the puzzles in LucasArts games were pretty balanced. The puzzles in Sierra's old stuff could often be convoluted, though.

 
Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis still holds up. The writing and humor in that game is top notch, plus very few convoluted puzzles. I grew up always hoping they would make a movie out of that story.
 
Neuro5i5 said:
My first adventure game...

screenshot_674-pirate-adventure-exploring-the-area.png
Click to expand...
Like I said, games on the TI99. All of them, this one included, loaded from tape cassette.

Souffrir said:
Adventure is just a crappy genre. You either play it for the puzzles, which seem to come in only two flavors (batshit crazy nonsense or absurdly simplistic), or you play it for the story/writing, which is even more hampered by all the ridiculous attempts at having some kind of gameplay than most game genres.

I understand there are games people like and even consider classic in the genre, but the genre itself is fundamentally bad and has always been fundamentally bad.
Click to expand...
34e9669658c581164425160267860edf855ad0417ec9b63abf81b58ea433dada.jpg


 
I recall a semi inside-joke in Secret of Monkey Island where you get a death/game over screen (I believe it was impossible to actually die in Secret of Monkey Island) that mocks Sierra games where you could frequently die.

Fake/realtime edit: here we go...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-_-QxerYno

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you could figure out some of the silly Quest for Glory clues, you're my hero.  That Saurus Rex was especially a bugger.  I mean.. I remember as a kid trying to figure out how to kill him.  Then that moment of glory, I finally got the bugger.... and then got nothing from killing him.

 
I wish the Laura Bow games were available still. I lost my copy like 20 years ago and I haven't found a release for it since.

Edit: Never mind, at least one is on GOG since 2017. Shows how much attention I pay.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
elessar123 said:
I wish the Laura Bow games were available still. I lost my copy like 20 years ago and I haven't found a release for it since.

Edit: Never mind, at least one is on GOG since 2017. Shows how much attention I pay.
Click to expand...
In case anyone was still wondering, this is how GOG only makes $7800 in an entire fiscal year. People who would be buying things don't hear about it when the games they want get released. There's no buzz when GOG adds games.

 
GauRocks said:
In case anyone was still wondering, this is how GOG only makes $7800 in an entire fiscal year. People who would be buying things don't hear about it when the games they want get released. There's no buzz when GOG adds games.
Click to expand...
It doesn't show up when you look for Laura Bow, which is why I missed it. Nothing in the titles mention anything about Laura Bow either. So you have to look for what the main title of each game is.

 
GauRocks said:
In case anyone was still wondering, this is how GOG only makes $7800 in an entire fiscal year. People who would be buying things don't hear about it when the games they want get released. There's no buzz when GOG adds games.
Click to expand...
This is my issue they get games way too late or no mention of them being added, I wonder why it takes them long to get them into their storefront

 
GOG should be always be advertsing when they have actually good older games that they have that aren't on other platforms. The discounts for the new games blow too. I've been waiting for some adventure games to go past 30% on sale for a while now.

 
Talking about childhood memories, do any of you remember the games by the Learning Company (Carmen Sandiego, Clue Finders, Reader Rabbit, Thinking Things, etc...)

 
Carmen Sandiego was great. I tried to find it online a bit ago and had no luck, was only able to find 1 YouTube video of it even.
Pretty sure I learned more from games like Carmen Sandiego and Age of Empires 2 than I did from geography/history in school.
 
A Carmen Sandiego game was one of the first PC games I ever played.  Seventh grade, IIRC.  Class where they showed us a bit about computers and taught us typing.  The first PC game I ever owned was a port of Star Wars the Arcade Game (Atari). 

Our first home PC was some sort of Epson (Equity something I would guess) and wasn't much benefit for gaming.  I think we briefly had a 486 of some sort?  And then some flavor of Pentium.  That was when I first started diving into some PC gaming because the computer came with a bunch of wing commander games and stuff like that and I played those a lot.  Although the stores I knew about didn't sell many PC games and so outside of those freebies, most of my real gaming started when I built my first PC at 18.  I can not for the life of me remember anything about it other than that I played Diablo 1, Icewind Dale 1/2 and the Baldur's Gate games on it, among others.  And lo the slippery slope had began.  I think my current system is the fifth one that I built but I am not sure about that at this point.

 
All this Carmen Sandiego talk: cool.

I'd love to see these come back.

And in an era when everything seems to get re-released on Steam and GOG, why not? Has any company even thought of re-releasing any of these classics to Steam/GOG? Who the heck owns the rights to these?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's usually the issue. Who owns the rights? Often it is uncertain, tho given the fact that there is a new animated series, maybe the rights aren't too unattainable.

Sent from my LGUS991 using Tapatalk
 
Most of the time the rights are held by companies that have no interest in video games and just have them for variety reasons or something.  See the shadow hearts series.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top